Received: from localhost (maia-4.hub.org [200.46.204.183])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D2B09FB734
	for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:57:50 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from postgresql.org ([200.46.204.71])
	by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.204.183]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024)
	with ESMTP id 03075-07 for <pgsql-sql-postgresql.org@postgresql.org>;
	Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:57:47 -0300 (ADT)
X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.4
Received: from smtp2.yandex.ru (smtp2.yandex.ru [213.180.200.18])
	by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C715C9FB68B
	for <pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>; Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:57:46 -0300 (ADT)
Received: from [82.209.238.118] ([82.209.238.118]:2827 "EHLO asup_tur"
	smtp-auth: "sql4-en" TLS-CIPHER: <none> TLS-PEER-CN1: <none>)
	by mail.yandex.ru with ESMTP id S3375525AbXDXL5Y (ORCPT
	<rfc822;pgsql-sql@postgresql.org>); Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:57:24 +0400
X-Comment: RFC 2476 MSA function at smtp2.yandex.ru logged sender identity as:
	sql4-en
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:00:45 +0300
From: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@narod.ru>
X-Mailer: The Bat! (v2.01) Personal
Reply-To: Dmitry Turin <sql4-en@narod.ru>
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
Message-ID: <12717281062.20070424150045@narod.ru>
To: pgsql-sql@postgresql.org
Subject: Fwd: Re[2]: We all are looped on Internet: request+transport =
	invariant
In-Reply-To: <462CA410.A3DD.0030.0@indicator.be>
References: <14110647859.20070413105812@narod.ru><20070413150936.GA31517@phl
	ogiston.dyndns.org><1684192906.20070419090827@narod.ru><20070419134808.GB14
	187@phlogiston.dyndns.org><20070419134808.GB14187@phlogiston.dyndns.org><81
	4860828.20070420120819@narod.ru><4628BCC8.A3DD.0030.0@indicator.be><1453364
	9203.20070420172127@narod.ru><462C7282.A3DD.0030.0@indicator.be><918607984.
	20070423130717@narod.ru> <462CA410.A3DD.0030.0@indicator.be>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.393 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=-0.247,
	BAYES_50=0.001, URIBL_SBL=1.639
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Archive-Number: 200704/222
X-Sequence-Number: 28222

Good day, Bart.

> I'll continue with the analogy

Let's suppose, that you want to compare rational and hierarchical
DBMS instead of discussion about removing gaskets
(by the way, hierarchical DBMS also need gasket between itself and
external world).
Because TML should integrated inside rational DBMS,
I think, this comparison is useful too.

First, let's accept convention to not use metaphore.
It would be better, if we compare concrete details.

Bart, under your influence i want to download and
try hierarchical DBMS, which you list
(Adabas, GT.M., IMS, DMSII, Focus, Metakit).
That is so much important,
because my wish to add TML to PG is growing :)

Excuse me, Bart, our institution use only OS "Windows",
thus at first stage let conduct comparison between TML and
hierarchical DBMS only for "Windows".

Several revisions:
1. "Adabas" is this
http://www.softwareag.com/Corporate/products/adabas/download/default.asp
(ada51.zip, 31Mb)?
2. "GT.M" exists only form Unix-like OS.
3. "IMS, DMSII, Focus" - i don't find link to download
4. "Metakit" is this
http://www.softlookup.com/download.asp?id=6904
(metakit-2.01.tar.gz, 607 Kb).
Our users consider, that it is no database in general.
I agree with them.

Are you agree to make comparison in discussion with me?


Dmitry Turin
http://html6.by.ru
http://sql4.by.ru
http://computer2.by.ru